The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the facts charged in this case were guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal principles on juvenile harmful businesses as prescribed in the Juvenile Protection Act or by misapprehending other relevant legal principles.

In addition, it is difficult to view that the provisions of the Juvenile Protection Act or its enforcement decree, which punishs a person who employs a juvenile to be harmful to juveniles, are unconstitutional against the principle of statutoryism and clarity.

Therefore, we cannot accept the argument of the grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.